W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2014

Re: Fwd: Accessibility tools

From: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 12:25:41 -0600
To: "w3c WAI List" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Cc: "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF0A670E0E.D65EC4DF-ON86257DA9.0061E280-86257DA9.00653DE7@us.ibm.com>
My recommendation:
I recommend a center of competency (e.g. W3C WAI Evaluation & Repair 
Working Group) maintain a matrix like table of contents or 
cross-referenced searchable index to document the current  and future 
status for which accessibility test tools on which platforms for each WCAG 
2.0 Success Criteria.   There are at least two approaches to display this 
reference - By WCAG 2.0 Success Criteria: this is what  tools are 
available for each Success Criteria by platform and by browser; versus the 
by platform view: this is the set of platforms and browsers an enterprise 
may have already established, what is the status of accessibility tools? 

A screen reader is just one tool set but covers a major set of the 38 
Level A and Double AA Success Criteria.  The automated checker tool(s) is 
a second set of tools.  Color Contrast Analyzers and other browser toolbar 
plug-ins are a third set of tools and often only cover a single or smaller 
set of Success Criteria. 

Context: Often we accessibility practitioners get engaged about the 
question: "what is the standard set of tools we should use to validate 
accessibility?"  and we get engaged to deliver courses that include 
training on tools for designers, developers, and testers.  How can the 
enterprise be enables?  The budget for tools and training is often a 
strong consideration in establishing the "standard tool set".  The browser 
and platform standards at an organization is another strong consideration 
for establishing the standard tool set, e.g. we hear a government agency 
say: "but we have to test on IE 9, our standard desktop browser", or the 
bank will say, "it has to run on Firefox ESR", etc.  The other strong 
consideration is the chosen standard set of platforms; iOS 8, Android 5.0, 
Windows 7, ChromeOS 40, etc.

Note: I am NOT talking about the accessibility capital S Standard - based 
on WCAG 2.0, but I'm talking about  the lower case standard set of 
browser, platforms and tools that an enterprise or project standardizes on 
. . . 

The WCAG working group alluded to this as the "accessibility supported" 
discussion: 
http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-accessibility-support-head

Examples:
Some organizations and tool vendors explain how to use various tools, but 
only includes some of the tools that have been decided upon to be 
standardize on based on some set of browsers and platform assumptions.  As 
new browsers and platforms are now no longer "emerging", but somewhat 
established with various levels of ARIA support for example; what is the 
current status and possibility for standardizing on them?  I believe this 
"research and documentation" should be a responsibility of WAI, just like 
the implementation techniques are documented - agreement? 

I need a reference to review if any of these screen readers are possible 
for establishing a "standard set" for accessibility verification test 
(AVT) - and of course why and why not?
        NVDA on Windows 7 with IE browser?
        ChromeVox on Windows 7 with the Chrome browser?
        ChromeVox on MacOS with the Chrome browser - or should Safari with 
VoiceOver be the standard, does it matter, why?
        Talkback on Android 5.0 with the _________ browser?

We can't test on every tool, every platform, and every browser 
combination, so which set is the "best set" for a project's standard set? 
We need references documented.  We need to know what is being worked on 
and which tools are being researched? 

There is a great set of questions and criteria with which to make 
decisions, but there is no summarized referenced data by tool - we need 
the "answers" too.
        see http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/selectingtools.html

So when Jen and others ask the question: which tools?  we can point them 
to a resource just like we can point developers to the techniques 
resources.

The list of tools at http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tools/index.html needs to 
cross-indexed by platform, by Success Criteria, by browser, and by content 
technology to be more useful.
____________________________________________
Regards,
Phill Jenkins, 
IBM Accessibility
http://www.ibm.com/able
http://www.facebook.com/IBMAccessibility
http://twitter.com/IBMAccess
http://www.linkedin.com/in/philljenkins



From:   Mike Elledge <melledge@yahoo.com>
To:     Jens Oliver Meiert <jens@meiert.com>, W3C WAI IG 
<w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Date:   12/09/2014 09:33 AM
Subject:        Re: Fwd: Accessibility tools



Hi Jens (all)--

I use different tools depending on the browser (most common shown by *):
IE: *Web Accessibility Toolbar, *WAVE
Firefox: FAE, Web Developer Toolbar, WAVE, Juicy Studio Accessibility 
plug-ins
Chrome: Web Developer Toolbar
Screenreaders: *JAWS, NVDA, VoiceOver and ChromeVox

Hope that helps!

Mike


On Tuesday, December 9, 2014 10:10 AM, Jens Oliver Meiert 
<jens@meiert.com> wrote:


Forwarding per suggestion from Andrew?cheers!


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jens Oliver Meiert <jens@meiert.com>
Date: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:46 PM
Subject: Accessibility tools
To: W3C WAI GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>


An informal question, what accessibility tools do people here trust
most these days?

I?m reviewing the accessibility section of UITest.com and am not sure
it?s up-to-date.

(Direct feedback okay if you happen to run any tools you like to see
listed there, or if you have any general feedback.)

--
Jens Oliver Meiert
http://meiert.com/en/
Received on Tuesday, 9 December 2014 18:26:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:53 UTC